BallReviews
General Category => PBA => Topic started by: greenefam on July 11, 2012, 06:01:18 PM
-
Can someone help me out with this question? I understand that times are financially tough for the PBA (not planning on debating why in this thread), but isn't a successful streaming service a vital part of solving this problem? As far as I can tell these guys aren't even trying.
I have tried to look into potentially signing up for Xtra Frame, but even if the content was amazing this thing is a joke. Here are a couple of my beefs:
- on PBA.com there is a link to 'Learn More' about Xtra Frame. The link brings you to a sign up page. Not a detailed marketing description of the service and the benefits, not some sample content, but a sign up page. How exactly did I learn more?
- a streaming service that is only available through an HTTP site is not a winning way to sell a streaming service in 2012. For home viewers most people use a set top box for streaming like PlayStation 3, XBox 360, AppleTV, Roku, etc. Don't the PBA marketing people realize how limiting their potential audience? For me this is the deal breaker.
- I looked at other sports where they provide a streaming subscription service. All of them (other than the PBA) offer an iOS and Android app. to view the content on mobile devices. Again, limiting the audience.
Xtra Frame should be one of those ways to move the PBA into the black. But if these things I've reference don't change I can't see it helping much.
-
Sometimes I think that the owners of the PBA actually want it to be a complete failure.
-
All excellent points. All more reasons why certain businesses fail. Technology today is everything sometimes, and cheaper then ever. No reason not to be ahead of the curve or at least near it.
-
almost 2 years later and still.....
- a streaming service that is only available through an HTTP site is not a winning way to sell a streaming service in 2012. For home viewers most people use a set top box for streaming like PlayStation 3, XBox 360, AppleTV, Roku, etc. Don't the PBA marketing people realize how limiting their potential audience? For me this is the deal breaker.
embarassing from the technology front
-
I was contemplating purchasing the Xtra Frame service but was turned off by the streaming service and the content that it was going to provide. Most of the time you can find the same videos on YouTube after the event just not the live stream.
-
In reference to the original post, I would suggest that this be sent to the PBA. We just had a meeting at the world series and I think that your opinion would be valued as a consumer/fan.
-
I have the ipad and iphone apps and stream to my TV through Apple TV...works fine for me. However, I get that this does not work for everyone.
-
I have the ipad and iphone apps and stream to my TV through Apple TV...works fine for me. However, I get that this does not work for everyone.
I have the android app and stream it to my smart tv
-
It's funny that the original post is over 2 years old and some of the same problems persist. I had Xtra frame for a few months over the summer during the summer swing. It feels ancient, and really like a dollar menu. It's cheap, but you get what you pay for, everyone knows what's going on here. The high definition isn't really high definition, full screen looks absolutely terrible, and trying to adjust the quality I found to be pretty problematic. A lot of the angles were pretty bad sometimes too, it's like there are only a very few cameras and they try to keep an eye on way too much. Once the angle gets so bad, you might as well just have a screen with nothing but all the scores and just do live updates. Plus there isn't enough competition of interest to justify it. Maybe once the women's tour starts back up there will be, but I find the USBC youtube channel, a free service, to be infinitely higher quality and vastly more user friendly. I'll also say I would GLADLY pay more for a better service. I'm probably in the minority here, but I would happily pay $15-$20 a month if the quality was higher. I have no interest in watching a badly pixelated, jittery feed of seniors I've never heard of bowling on 21&22 from a camera set behind 17&18.
-
Xtra Frame is a perfect example of the owners of the PBA not caring about their product. These guys all have a hi tech background but the allow Xtra Frame to stay with 15 year old technology.
-
BR needs a like button . .
Xtra Frame is a perfect example of the owners of the PBA not caring about their product. These guys all have a hi tech background but the allow Xtra Frame to stay with 15 year old technology.
-
BR needs a like button . .
Xtra Frame is a perfect example of the owners of the PBA not caring about their product. These guys all have a hi tech background but the allow Xtra Frame to stay with 15 year old technology.
I've watched few events but I stopped because of the qaulity of the sound and picture. Yes I am spoiled with my HD's and Plasmas TV's at home. Also, when some of these Joe Bowl puts a video ball review on Youtube, it's actually better quality than XF.
Watching XF is like watching local high school football. it's better to be on the field than at home.....the quality is the main reason I don't get XF....
-
Maybe I'm really in the minority on this. Yes, Bowl.com's stuff on YouTube is of a higher video quality. But I bought Xtra Frame so I can at least check out some bowling action particularly during the qualifying rounds. Where else are you going to find that?
You know, I'm sure most of us long for the old ABC Sports days of Chris Schenkel and Nelson Burton, Jr. when the finals were aired live. At best, though, they might have shown a 20-second clip from the qualifying rounds only once during a television season. That clip was usually the final shot of someone's 300 game: Teata Semiz comes to mind, but I don't remember the tournament or year (For that reason, I'm glad there is an Xtra Frame. I think they're doing better in the presentation of things and, yes, they still have a way to go.)
I'm not a PBA apologist or homer. I've heard as a consistent complaint among active PBA members how it seems the current ownership doesn't care about the people who really matters most, the players themselves. It's rather troubling. But without a 'PBA', there is nothing bowlers of a higher skill level have to identify with, aspire or to compete; there is no prestige. And maybe that's still the problem the ownership doesn't get.
-
Xtra Frame is a perfect example of the owners of the PBA not caring about their product. These guys all have a hi tech background but the allow Xtra Frame to stay with 15 year old technology.
This is the point that I was trying to make with my original post over 2 years ago. Besides the fact that the technology is very old and dated, the web presence to explain the service and to spell out the details are STILL non-existent. I would love for the PBA to succeed, but I still cannot in good conscious pay for this clearly inferior streaming product.
-
Maybe I'm really in the minority on this. Yes, Bowl.com's stuff on YouTube is of a higher video quality. But I bought Xtra Frame so I can at least check out some bowling action particularly during the qualifying rounds. Where else are you going to find that?
Agreed. I purchased Xtra Frame before the WSB, and felt I got my monies worth just watching those events. Yea, maybe I could have got some highlights on YouTube, and the overall technology could use an upgrade, but it's hard to complain about the value for what you get.